The topic was already announced in the previous post.
Now it's time to read.
And listen.
And [try to] understand.
Ted Chiang
"This is a warning.
Please read carefully.
By now you’ve probably seen a Predictor; millions of them have been sold by the time you’re reading this. For those who haven’t seen one, it’s a small device, like a remote for opening your car door. Its only features are a button and a big green LED. The light flashes if you press the button. Specifically, the light flashes one second before you press the button.
Most people say that when they first try it, it feels like they’re playing a strange game, one where the goal is to press the button after seeing the flash, and it’s easy to play. But when you try to break the rules, you find that you can’t. If you try to press the button without having seen a flash, the flash immediately appears, and no matter how fast you move, you never push the button until a second has elapsed. If you wait for the flash, intending to keep from pressing the button afterwards, the flash never appears. No matter what you do, the light always precedes the button press. There’s no way to fool a Predictor.
The heart of each Predictor is a circuit with a negative time delay — it sends a signal back in time. The full implications of the technology will become apparent later, when negative delays of greater than a second are achieved, but that’s not what this warning is about. The immediate problem is that Predictors demonstrate that there’s no such thing as free will.
There have always been arguments showing that free will is an illusion, some based on hard physics, others based on pure logic. Most people agree these arguments are irrefutable, but no one ever really accepts the conclusion. The experience of having free will is too powerful for an argument to overrule. What it takes is a demonstration, and that’s what a Predictor provides.
Typically, a person plays with a Predictor compulsively for several days, showing it to friends, trying various schemes to outwit the device. The person may appear to lose interest in it, but no one can forget what it means — over the following weeks, the implications of an immutable future sink in.
Some people, realizing that their choices don’t matter, refuse to make any choices at all. Like a legion of Bartleby the Scriveners, they no longer engage in spontaneous action. Eventually, a third of those who play with a Predictor must be hospitalized because they won’t feed themselves. The end state is akinetic mutism, a kind of waking coma. They’ll track motion with their eyes, and change position occasionally, but nothing more. The ability to move remains, but the motivation is gone.
Before people started playing with Predictors, akinetic mutism was very rare, a result of damage to the anterior cingulate region of the brain. Now it spreads like a cognitive plague. People used to speculate about a thought that destroys the thinker, some unspeakable lovecraftian horror, or a Gödel sentence that crashes the human logical system. It turns out that the disabling thought is one that we’ve all encountered: the idea that free will doesn’t exist. It just wasn’t harmful until you believed it.
Doctors try arguing with the patients while they still respond to conversation. We had all been living happy, active lives before, they reason, and we hadn’t had free will then either. Why should anything change? “No action you took last month was any more freely chosen than one you take today,” a doctor might say. “You can still behave that way now.” The patients invariably respond, “But now I know.” And some of them never say anything again.
Some will argue that the fact the Predictor causes this change in behaviour means that we do have free will. An automaton cannot become discouraged, only a free-thinking entity can.
The fact that some individuals descend into akinetic mutism whereas others do not just highlights the importance of making a choice. Unfortunately, such reasoning is faulty: every form of behaviour is compatible with determinism. One dynamic system might fall into a basin of attraction and wind up at a fixed point, whereas another exhibits chaotic behaviour indefinitely, but both are completely deterministic.
I’m transmitting this warning to you from just over a year in your future: it’s the first lengthy message received when circuits with negative delays in the mega-second range are used to build communication devices. Other messages will follow, addressing other issues. My message to you is this: pretend that you have free will. It’s essential that you behave as if your decisions matter, even though you know that they don’t. The reality isn’t important: what’s important is your belief, and believing the lie is the only way to avoid a waking coma. Civilization now depends on self-deception. Perhaps it always has.
And yet I know that, because free will is an illusion, it’s all predetermined who will descend into akinetic mutism and who won’t. There’s nothing anyone can do about it — you can’t choose the effect the Predictor has on you. Some of you will succumb and some of you won’t, and my sending this warning won’t alter those proportions.
So why did I do it?
Because I had no choice."
- Listen to the audio short story here:
© 2005 Nature Publishing Group



I’ ve been trying to melt tonight this fantastic story and Barry Schwartz’s speech about The paradox of Choice. It would be surprising a new end to his theory:
ReplyDeleteThe more options we have when we make a choice., the worse we feel. But no matter what you choose or how you feel afterwards because we are all determined “ free will is an illusion” .
Only if you live knowing you’re determined will you live a happy life.
Ana A.
I'm so happy you enjoyed the short short-story (it even won a prize), and that it stirred in you so many profound, valid thoughts about the way we live our lives. The only point I would add is: to what extent are we all determined? Could we break the "circularity" of Ted Chiang's story, and if so, in what way?
DeleteTime has come for some examples, so, hopefully, someone will try to offer a situation for debate.
As the author also says, I believe that our destiny is already defined and that our actions lead us to that destiny. There is little point in telling you, what if I hadn't chosen this path and I had chosen another? But that's how it was going to happen.
DeleteWhat is advisable is to live life as it comes, making the decisions you have to make and without thinking continuously about what would have happened if you had chosen another option. And to make the most correct decisions possible, it is best to be well educated. Only in this way can you lead a more or less happy life, with its good things and bad things, as it always happens.
Sara Soria
Many philosophers and scientists throughout history have been for and against determinism. I think that it is not possible to show clearly by giving proof or evidence that we are all determined. Nevertheless, It is even more difficult to demonstrate the opposite, partly because intuition tells us that we have the power to make our own decisions.
ReplyDeleteHeroic exploits like the Shakleton’s one seems to contradict The Theory of Determinism because, in extreme circumstances, a hero seems to be able to overcome any twist of fate. Films are full of these acts of heroism and, as you said, time has come for some examples. One of the most impressive heroic struggles I ever seen takes place in John Mc Tiernan’s Predator. The leading actor manages to kill a technologically advance form of extraterrestrial life, the Predator. The alien is a formidable opponent, much stronger and with better weapons than our hero. Nevertheless, the human improvises a way to succeed in dealing with all the difficulties.
You have a point there, about humans' intuition: in a way, the very need to believe we have the power to make our own decisions is what prevents us from becoming akinetic, as Chiang says in his short story.
DeleteBut what is surprising indeed has to do - again - with the myths of old: ingenuity (mind you, a false friend, it means cleverness at contriving) was what made David defeat Goliath. In literature, Chiang's work is an example of how to draw on the collective world-view which has become a huge database for writers: intertextuality. Some supposedly innocent statements in his dense writing ("Civilization now depends on self-deception") is proof that those "heroic times" are over.
Conversely, judging from Shackleton's true experience, we have to admit that, even if the David-Goliath episode seems exaggerated, it did influence the minds of men in the sense of providing them (us?) with the IDEA: if he was able to do it, why wouldn't I, too?
First of all, this is an interesting and breathtaking story, which make us meditate about almost everything, including the sense of living...
ReplyDeleteThe scenario described in the short story is an apparently science-fiction scenario... or maybe not?
The idea about free will does not actually exist has been sown after reading the story... and can make about reconsidering if there is a pre-set fate
The threats to the world population caused by akinetic mutism can be awful, as this condition lets you in a kind of waking come, in which your motivation is gone.
The current events might change the course of the world as we know it for sure... maybe this point was thought before the current world situation was come, but nowadays with the Coronavirus crisis punching worlwide, it is impossible that the future is not marked by this situation...
Óscar Alonso
Dear Óscar,
DeleteYou're right in every respect! That's what makes Ted Chiang such a celebrated Sci-Fi writer, winner of innumerable awards, influential in the genre for more than 20 years.
Only men of genius (no gender discrimination intended) like him could have captured the importance of having a sense of PURPOSE in life. The current situation, at the same time terrifying and unnatural, will undoubtedly produce a "new normal", as they say.